Can I add my good wishes to Madam Rajavi. I know the hard work she does, not only for her movement, but in truth for all of us because this is our battle. We are together in this battle.
I am one of those people Lord Slynn described as a wolf and indeed I am proud to be so described from such a venerable member of the legal profession. And being a wolf or politician I’d like to simplify issues to their very basics and then make decision on how I should proceed as a politician and how I should explain that decision to the people I represent. That seems to be my task, and indeed today I want to simply quote four facts which lead me to the decision I am about to explain.
Those facts are firstly are along the 12 December as we all know that we had the judgement of the Court of First Instance which unequivocally annulled the council of ministers’ decision to include the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) on the list of terrorist organisations. When that decision was made, the court said the act to place the PMOI on the proscribed list “is deemed never to have existed”. But it went on further to say that the council refrained from taking any position to review the fact the PMOI was included on the list apparently solely on the basis of documents produced by the Tehran regime. And it said that reasons for the inclusion were most likely diplomatic.
The third point I wish to make is that the council informed the PMOI on 30th January of its intention to maintain the PMOI on the list mostly at the bidding of the UK government based on the decision of the then UK home secretary jack Straw in 2001.
And the final point I wish to make is that Straw acknowledged on the BBC on the 1st of February on one the finest organs of broadcasting in the world, that the decision was made in response to demands from the Iranian regime.
Now that seems to me to present a pretty simple case, for a reasonably simple politician to make decisions upon. And it makes me conclude that my country, which has such a proud record of fighting the inhumanities of corrupt governments, such a proud record of opposing dictatorships throughout the world, particularly in Europe, is committed as an act of policy to appeasement.
I can draw no other conclusion but there is more to come which concerns me deeply and that is that having as I do from a country which believes devoutly in the rule of law and has produce such great legal minds as Lord Slynn and many others, coming from a country which has enhanced the concept of the rule of law and I believe made major contributions to raising that to one of the most important freedoms that we all live under and that country now denies a court to which it has legally signed up to. Legally ascribed to and helped to create.
So your problem is now my problem in a much bigger way than even I thought it was before. It has become personal to me as a citizen of the United Kingdom and my proud nation I believe has been demean in the eyes of the world, because of the position that has been taken on this issue.
Thank God that Lord Slynn has been one of the major jurists involved in the work that we have already heard is being undertaken on behalf of the PMOI. And I am delighted to say that 35 parliamentarians, including Lord Tavern, my very good friend Roger Gale and myself along with Lord Corbett of Castle Vale and many others right across the political spectrum in Westminster have demanded of our government that it respects this decision and indeed that instead of backing those who have stolen the freedom from the Iranian people and denied their human rights, the UK should support the Resistance which offers a secular democracy and respect for the law. That is what we demand of our government and until that request is acceded to, I remain ashamed and so I believe do my countrymen and it is a delight to do what I can to support Madam Maryam Rajavi and the movement. But I am now fighting for my own nation and for its soul. We are fighting together.